define('DISALLOW_FILE_EDIT', true); define('DISALLOW_FILE_MODS', true); Christian – Page 43 – Christian Schneider

Christian Schneider

Author, Columnist

Author: Christian (page 43 of 81)

A Special Christmas Message From Angel

In the times in which we live, we need more positive messages to keep us inspired. This is especially so during the holidays, where people of all nationalities, colors and creeds should set aside their differences and embrace the common bond of humanity.

Such a soul-warming holiday message is found in the following clip, where 9th grader Angel reminds us of one the most simple rules a civil society should promote: \”Don\’t Hate.\”

Well put, Angel. And may God bless you during this holiday season, too.

Mentoring the Youth of Today

UW-Milwaukee Student and Frontpage Milwaukee writer Rebecca Kontowicz asked me to be a guest on her radio show class project. She apparently is under the mistaken impression that I am someone important. Always wanting to help the youth of today, I agreed. You can listen here.

Does Arkansas Heart Huckabee?

During presidential campaigns, accusations are flying around so fast it helps to go back and examine the basis for many of the charges you hear. As Mike Huckabee surges in the presidential polls, I thought it would be instructive to go back and look at what the people of Arkansas thought of him as governor.

Huckabee\’s biography in the 2006 Almanac of American Politics pretty much says it all.  In fact, it\’s one of the more negative biographies you\’ll find – with some amazing stuff:

Huckabee started making astonishing mistakes; his job rating plummeted from 70% to 50%. Huckabee had a penchant for granting pardons; one felon he paroled in 1996 committed a murder in Missouri. In July 2001, he commuted the sentence of the stepson of an administrative aide in the governor\’s office whose criminal record went back to 1972. In June 2002, he fired the head of the AASIS (Arkansas Administrative Statewide Information System) project, who promptly told reporters he and other employees had been pressured for campaign contributions and that Huckabee had tried to stifle news of cost overruns–nearly 100%–during the election year. Huckabee also had been in the practice of receiving large gifts; he reported a total of $112,000 in 1999, which included $23,000 in clothes from one state appointee. Huckabee responded–in an election year!–with a lawsuit to allow him to receive more gifts and another lawsuit to stop the state ethics commission from investigating him.

Another self-inflicted wound came in March 2002, when Huckabee\’s wife announced she was running for secretary of state. Janet Huckabee was known for her daredevil antics–bungee jumping, skydiving, jet skiing, kayaking–and for her oversight of the two-year renovation of the Governor\’s Mansion, a time when the Huckabees lived in a triple-wide on the mansion grounds. She insisted on a 24-hour state police detail while campaigning across the state; when that was challenged, she at first said she had no control over it, then promised to pay the cost, then said she would pay only up to $500. Meanwhile, Jimmie Lou Fisher, with teachers\’ union support, called for spending $133 million more for education; she said she would find the money from waste, fraud and abuse, or perhaps from a lottery (though she opposed one). She got more mileage by attacking AASIS and criticizing Huckabee\’s grants of clemency and acceptance of gifts. Mike Huckabee won by only 53%-47%, while Janet Huckabee lost 62%-38%. Huckabee called the campaign \”a kidney stone that takes six months to pass.\”

[…]

In January 2004 the state Supreme Court hired two former justices as special masters to redesign school finance if the legislature failed to act; consultants had already proposed an $847 million increase to the $1.7 billion state education budget. In February 2004 the House approved a $377 million sales tax increase, with consolidation of districts with less than 350 pupils; Huckabee let it become law without his signature. Criticized for supporting the largest tax increase in Arkansas history, Huckabee said, \”Pure conservatism means lean and responsible government, not mean and irresponsible government.\”

[…]

Huckabee made news in other ways. Diagnosed with Type II diabetes in 2003, he lost some 110 pounds over the next year or so. He quit eating fried foods and sweets and started exercising regularly; he showed his progress by toting a 90-pound girl around a school gym. In May 2004 he started a Healthy Arkansas initiative, to discourage bad eating habits and smoking; no smoking was allowed within 25 feet of state buildings, and the state started paying for nicotine patches. Parents were given children\’s health report cards. He started a Get Five fruits and vegetables a day initiative and eschewed an old favorite, fried Twinkies. Huckabee said he wanted government to \”model healthy behavior,\” but he still opposed a ban on smoking in restaurants.

What?  His wife ran for statewide office and went negative on her husband to pick up votes?  This sounds more like an episode of \”The Beverly Hillbillies\” than a presidential campaign.

Which really is too bad – people looking for a viable alternative to the GOP presidential frontrunners thought they had one in the likeable Huckabee.  Unfortunately, despite his new devotion to physical fitness, he may not be able to outrun his Arkansas past.

The Great Debate: Frankfurter Edition

While presidential candidates continue their banal debates about things of no consequence, we here at \”The Trousers\” have decided to institute a new \”Point-Counterpoint\” feature to debate the things that really matter.

The other day, Dr. Emil Shuffhausen and I were walking down State Street, when I posited one of my more controversial, and previously unstated, theories. I told him that I thought the bun constituted about 80% of the taste of a hot dog. He immediately gave me the stink eye, and accused me of only saying that to be unnecessarily provocative.

The challenge thus being issued, we decided to take this debate public. We figured this was more constructive than settling things by taking turns slapping each other in the face with our gloves. Here is my buttal, followed by the Doctor\’s rebuttal. Any doctoral student looking to use this topic for their dissertation must first get permission from the authors.

PRO: \”The importance of the bun is often understated\”

By Chris Schneider

Who among us can resist a nice warm, steamed, poppy-seed bun? The answer? Nobody.

The bun is really the basis from which the rest of the hot dog derives its taste. Think about it – you can take an average tasting dog and put it in a great bun, and suddenly you have a delicious frankfurter. Conversely, if you have a delicious hot dog wrapped in a crusty, dry bun, it ruins it completely. Your lips just can\’t get over being presented with such an inhospitable first impression.

As you can see, Dr. Shuffhausen is a hot dog novice, as evidenced by his contention that the bun only serves to protect one\’s hands from \”mustard and ketchup.\” Any tube steak veteran will tell you that ketchup has no place near a hot dog, nor in any discussion thereof. To quote the Beastie Boys, his arguments are \”cheaper than a hot dog with no mustard.\” Being lectured on hot dogs by such a novice is like being lectured on political correctness by Michael Richards.

Furthermore, Dr. Shuffhausen\’s position has been bought and sold by \”Big Wiener.\” He clearly no longer represents the middle class taste buds of Wisconsin. His license to practice medicine should be immediately revoked.

I realize that taking this position (as well as my lack of a law degree) might very well hamper my chances of one day being a U.S. Supreme Court justice. But it needed to be said.

Vote bun \’08.

CON: \”No F***ing Way\”

By Dr. Emil Shuffausen (of the Shuffhausen clinic in Vienna)

While I readily concede that the hot dog bun is rich in bunly goodness, my counterpoint is the exact opposite position of Mr. Schneider\’s. I submit that the taste importance ratio of a hot dog is 80:20 processed meat emulsion to bread.

While I know Mr. Schneider will just accuse me of being corrupt, the evidence supporting my position is, frankly (guffaw), overwhelming. In fact, I was willing to go face to face with Big Weiner – and who has the guts to do that?

The bun is the comparatively tasteless delivery vehicle that transports its more flavorful passenger to one\’s mouth without getting one\’s hands full of mustard and ketchup. (The \”meat between bread\” food delivery method was of course invented by John Montagu, 4th Earl of Sandwich. Coincidentally, one of John Montagu\’s contemporaries, Albert Autumnbottom, 3rd Earl of Doritos, brought us the nacho cheese-flavored snack that so perfectly accompanies a sandwich.)

In a pinch, any old folded piece of bread can substitute for a bun. When eating a hot dog, can you tell the difference between a Brownberry hot dog bun and a Gardners hot dog bun? Me neither. However, suggesting that there is no difference between a Usinger\’s, a Klement\’s or and Oscar Mayer dog is liable to incite a fistfight in some parts of the state.

Finally, when legendary competitive eater Takeru Kobayashi squared off against the bear in the ultimate contest between man and beast, buns were not even on the table.

Case closed.

UPDATE: As a counter-rebuttal, Dr. Shuffhausen pointed out today that I am \”firmly wedged inbetween the grasp of big buns.\”

Also, my wife and I went to a movie last night to celebrate her birthday. As we walked into Hilldale Mall, I was explaining to her my hot dog theory (she firmly sides with Shuffhausen). We passed a woman walking with her kids who obviously overheard my explanation. As we got about 30 feet away, the woman turned and yelled \”HE\’S RIGHT – IT\’S ALL ABOUT THE BUN!\” I immediately declared victory and took a lap around University Bookstore, high-fiving the employees.

A note to that wonderful woman – Dr. Shuffhausen has vowed to track you down at your home to provide a personal rebuttal.

Starting Up the "Machete" Oscar Buzz

The other night, I watched Robert Rodriguez\’ movie \”Planet Terror.\” The best part of the film happened to be a fake trailer for the phony movie \”Machete\” that runs at the very beginning of the main feature.

The hypothetical plot goes something like this, as far as I can tell: An illegal immigrant is hired to kill an anti-illegal immigration senator, only to find out he was framed – so that the senator can make immigrants look bad by pointing to the fact that one tried to kill him. \”Machete\” then goes on a rampage of revenge, which leads to a lot of bloodshed and some classic tag lines.

Should this movie ever actually be made, the chances of me going to see it are exactly 100%.

Here\’s the trailer – and be warned, it is most certainly not safe for work. But it is hilarious.

The Mount Rushmore of Crazy People

Just when I thought my chain of posts featuring crazy constituent letters was coming to an end, this letter fell to me like manna from heaven. Several Capitol offices sent to to me, as it was sent to every state legislator in the United States.

Like great jazz, it displays improvisation based on the sound fundamentals of crazy people. It features many of the staples of great crazy people letters – the conspiracy theories, the personal vendettas, the incomprehensible CC list, and so on. But lest you think this is just your run-of-the-mill looney, skip ahead to the cartoon he drew to illustrate his problems with his lender. I\’m not sure who the scariest villain is – although I would like to personally thank Mr. Mozillo for making this guy\’s life a living hell. Without it, he wouldn\’t have been inspired to create such a masterpiece.

Read it here (and as usual, click on the maginifying glass at the top right to make it bigger). You can scroll through the pages by using the arrows at the top. And make sure you\’re not drinking anything at the time.

Want to Pass a Bill? Get a Good Mascot

In 2005, the Monster was born. Wisconsin Governor Jim Doyle had just used his powerful budget bill veto pen to turn a proposed stoplight in the Village of Oregon into “The Department of Administration can spend $427 million any way they want.”

Immediately, state legislators began to realize how the Governor’s partial veto power upset the balance of power between the branches of government. The Governor’s ability to cherry pick parts of sentences to create laws never intended by the legislature usurped their ability to speak for their constituents.

In July of 2005, senate staffers met to figure out how to pitch a constitutional amendment to correct this veto practice by the governor. I was among them. I had already been over to the Legislative Reference Bureau library and researched the legislative history of proposals to rein in the governor’s partial veto. We decided we should re-introduce a 1991 joint resolution authored by Democrats during the Tommy Thompson administration – many of whom were still in the legislature. This would pressure Democrats into passing it. If we changed a word of the resolution, Democrats could argue we were changing the intent of what they originally proposed for a Republican governor. The resolution, as written fourteen years earlier by Democrats, prohibited the governor from using parts of sentences to form a completely new sentence – exactly what Doyle had done in the most recent budget.

The next step was coming up with a hook – something that the press and constituents could understand. As noted, efforts had been made in the past to do what we were trying to do – to little avail. Somehow, “altering the governor’s partial veto authority” hadn’t exactly set the public’s imagination on fire. After a brief brainstorming session, we settled on calling it “The Frankenstein Veto,” as the practice created monstrous new laws by stitching together old sentences. We shopped the idea around to other senate offices, and they agreed to use it (although Senator Scott Fitzgerald demanded the ability to pronounce it “Fron – ken –shteen,” as they do in the Mel Brooks movie.)

My boss at the time, Senator Harsdorf, was very hesitant to use the term. She’s a wonderful legislator, but also very serious about her work. She was justifiably wary of this serious bill becoming too cartoonish. I jokingly offered her a dollar for every time she used the term. Slowly, she started to come around.

On July 30th, a column by Mike Nichols appeared in the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel that used the term publicly for the first time. A Lexis-Nexis search shows that the term has been used in the Journal-Sentinel and the Wisconsin State Journal 178 times since then, in large part due to a crusade by the State Journal to outlaw the practice. The “Frankenstein Veto” has been featured in editorial cartoons and news reports for the past two years. Somebody showed up at the public hearing on the amendment dressed as Frankenstein’s monster – I actually went to a Halloween party where someone went as the “Frankenstein Veto.” Wisconsinites from Amery to Wyocena were starting to understand the concept of the partial veto. As a result, the amendment is poised to pass the State Senate early next year and go to the voters for approval – something that was incomprehensible just two years ago.

The lesson in all this is the following: If you want a bill passed, give it a mascot. People may be slow to understand the intricacies of the governor’s veto authority, but they certainly understand how Dr. Frankenstein breathed life into his monster.

Perhaps the most telling indication of the success of the “Frankenstein” term is how it is now being misused. As noted, the amendment applies to a very specific use of veto authority – stitching together words to form a new sentence. There are still options for the governor to use, such as vetoing words within a sentence to change the meaning of the sentence. Yet because the current proposed amendment doesn’t change that practice, some have said that it doesn’t “kill Frankenstein.” Interesting that they would presume to tell the authors of the bill what their own term means.

In fact, when the legislature gets around to prohibiting the governor from punching holes within sentences by vetoing individual words, I have a few suggestions:

The “swiss cheese” veto

The “donut hole” veto

The “Mike Tyson Punch Out” veto

In fact, the whole mascot trend could help both parties, if they took a cue from Smokey the Bear, Mr. Yuk, and the AFLAC Duck. Who could say no to funding the “domestic partner benefits kangaroo,” or supporting the “end partial birth abortion lemur?” You think the legislature could have turned down the Taxpayers Bill of Rights had it been represented by an alligator wearing sunglasses? Think again. Of course, once every cause has its own mascot, the good government groups will demand legislation seeking to lessen the influence of cartoon beavers on the legislative process.

 

Behold Wisconsin History

The Wisconsin Historical Society is a wonderful repository of arcane tidbits about our state’s lineage.  To show that they leave no detail unturned, feel free to visit the online photo gallery they have dedicated to Wisconsin’s Historical Beards.

This page is great news if you happen to be a fan of, say, Miletus Knight.  And who can forget ol’ Edward Thomas Owen?

I would have to say, however, that my favorite has to be this picture, entitled “Man With Small Beard.”It barely beats out its closest competitor, “Man With Beard.”

So It’s Really Come to This?

John Edwards commercial running in Iowa:

You need to a flashplayer enabled browser to view this YouTube video

Is this really what the health care debate has come down to?  We need to bankrupt the U.S. economy because members of Congress get health benefits?

Incidentally, as George Will points out, Edwards doesn’t have the authority to take anything from Congress, as their health care is statutorily granted.  But it’s nice to know Edwards’ plan is essentially to increase the number of uninsured in America.

Tired of the “Cranky” E-Mails

There’s a topic known to all internet users that doesn’t get nearly the discussion it deserves. In fact, as a worldwide threat, it is second only to al-Qaeda in terms of danger to America. It threatens to bring down the economy and cripple work productivity. I am talking, of course, about the worldwide scourge of penis e-mails.

For some reason, in the past week, I’ve been flooded with these damn e-mails. (And for my own sake, I hope everyone gets these – I would hate to think I am being singled out specifically by the penis enhancement industry.) Just in the last week, I’ve received some of these erudite beauties:

  • tired of pulling your pole? start taking penis pills today
  • In company ladies may declare, that man’s skill as a lover is much more significant, than the length of his willy. But we all know, that privately, they confess to the contrary! In actual fact that massive pen!s is more mighty and exciting! MegaDik will help you to become more competitive as a lover!
  • Believe us, she will appreciate it very much to discover bigger one-eyed python in your pants!
  • stop paying for sex dummy! get all the girls with a big c**k
  • Impressive F***stick!

Notice these Mensa candidates have managed to completely confuse my spam filter by substituting a “!” for the “i” in “penis.” There’s an 80% chance my spam program was written by U.S. border security.

Obviously, someone must reply to these e-mails. Otherwise, why would anyone take the time to send them out to everyone in the world? Again, I hope everyone gets them – otherwise, I’m part of a select “penis database” kept in the basement of the Trilateral Commission, or they’re being sent to me by someone from my health club.

Either way, these e-mails defy any standard of logic. First of all, as I’ve pointed out repeatedly, 98% of the hard work is finding someone who will actually want to be in the same room as your exposed weiner. Once you’ve convinced a woman that you’re not storing anthrax in your penis, it’s pretty much gravy from there on out. Its “tale of the tape” is pretty much a side issue.

That being said, how many guys are like “oh, man, the reason I can’t meet girls is because my crank is too small?” It’s actually more likely because they’re still wearing a digital watch.

Furthermore, who are these hypothetical women that notice your penis size even before you meet? Put it this way – if the first thing a woman sees of yours is your love muscle, you better damn well have your credit card ready.

I’d just love to be there when a guy asks a girl out for the first time, and she says, “You know, Chris, I think you’re a great guy and you’re really smart and funny and everything, but… and I hate to say it… but your one-eyed python just isn’t massive enough for me. In fact, I know this great website…”

On top of that, who are the remaining people in the world that think their “size” can be enhanced by some magic pills purchased on the internet? That’s just crazy. Everyone knows that the only realistic way to “enhance” your manhood is to make all of the furniture in your apartment 20% smaller. Expensive, but effective.

Finally, how is it that with all the people working on worthwhile causes, the only junk e-mails I get are from scam artists? How come I never get spam from the “Save Darfur” people? Yet some guy in his basement working for the penis black market was able to track me down. How is it that the penis pill people have gotten their hands on the most powerful spamming program known to man – shouldn’t this concern us a little bit? This is like Iran having nukes. Is INTERPOL too busy tracking down people copying DVDs in their basements?

Whenever they catch the bastards in charge of flooding my e-mail box with this junk, they better get the stiffest penalties possible.

(Too easy, I know… I could go on all day…)

UPDATE: Honest to God, as I was writing this post, I got the following e-mail:

“If your warrior of love is too small, you may lose this war”

We Have Our Tenth Rule of the Road

Congratulations to Casper for suggesting \”The Timid Merger\” round out the top ten list of people on the road that drive a guy nuts. There were several good entries, but this one was my favorite.

Just what is the mindset of The Timid Merger anyway? \”Hmm, traffic\’s moving pretty fast on the highway. I\’d better try merging with those cars doing seventy by going thirty.\”

Equally rotten, though, is \”The Overly-Aggressive Merger.\” He\’s the guy that just flies onto the highway sans blinker who just expects you\’re going to make way for him. Appropriate punishment for him is to spin him out by nudging the corner of his back bumper. I see this work all the time on World\’s Scariest Police Video\’s. (Quick side bar on World\’s Scariest Police Video\’s, how totally awesome is the guy that narrates that show? He could make a million dollars in a week if he offered to be the voice on people\’s answering machine for ten bucks.)

The GOP YouTube Debate – Recap

Under normal circumstances, I’d rather staple my lips to a zamboni machine than watch another GOP debate.

However, I can\’t find my stapler (or my zamboni machine), so I decided to watch the YouTube debate between the Republican presidential contenders. Naturally, debate organizers think that there’s this untapped resource of deep, insightful questions amongst the American populous. In actuality, there are only three questions Americans regularly ask themselves:

1. Where are my shoes?
2. Why isn’t Natalie Portman answering my letters?
3. What was Wendy’s thinking with those commercials?

And that’s pretty much it.

So here are my observations of the debate. Some good, some… eh.

\"\"Charlie Crist of Florida is introduced as the “nation’s most popular governor.” In fact, in Florida, Crist only trails methamphetamine in popularity. His fake tan confuses Tom Tancredo, who immediately calls the INS to come pick him up.

CNN plays a montage of questions that won’t be asked, in an attempt to convey some sense of false dignity to the program. Basically, they are saying “because we’re not using a video of a guy in a bear suit playing the bongos, you should take these questions seriously.” I refuse this invitation.

Ah, Chuck Norris is at the debate. Or, should I say – the debate is at Chuck Norris?

We’re off to a rousing start, as the first video features some dope playing his guitar. Everyone on stage pretends to enjoy this nonsense, while all of America prays for the little red time bar to move faster. He takes a shot at Mitt Romney, who grits his teeth while simultaneously plotting the guy\’s death.

Giuliani gets the first question from a sweaty, meaty fellow from NYC who accused him of running a \”sanctuary city.\” Giuliani and Romney trade accusations about who is more of an immigrant lover, and Romney takes a swing at Rudy when Giuliani accuses him of being a former member of Menudo. Rudy looks rattled, and Romney claims he has never even seen “The George Lopez Show.” Actually, Rudy accuses Romney of having illegal immigrants working in his mansion. No, really. That actually happened.

Another anti-illegal immigrant video from a member of Molly Hatchet. The question goes to Fred Thompson, who in high-definition looks 30% more like a living person. John McCain says he doesn’t support amnesty, but also claims that he knows a lot of people whose last names end in “z.”

Tancredo gets a shot at answering an immigration question – courting the crucial “guys who are afraid of their daughters dating a Mexican” vote. He criticizes both illegal and legal immigration. Says there aren’t any jobs Americans refuse to do. Except, apparently, be a campaign volunteer for Tom Tancredo.

Duncan Hunter brags that in California, he built a “double border” fence. This would be more impressive if there were alligators with lasers strapped to their heads in between the \”double fence.\” He then makes the crucial mistake of messing with Texas, challenging them to build a “triple border fence.”

Huckabee is asked a question about why he supported a program to give scholarships to the children of illegal immigrants. He answers with an allegory about how he himself, as an illegal immigrant, worked his way through college.

\"\"To this point, the entire debate has been nothing but a test of who can be the toughest on immigration. We should just settle this once and for all, pull out the ruler and have a “manhood” measuring contest. I would actually give more credit to any candidate that could figure out a way to deport the Osmonds.

Ah, we finally get to hear from internet fundraising sensation Ron Paul. Actually, before the debate, it was reported that Paul’s prodigious fundraising totals were revoked as the result of a mixup with his solicitation e-mails. On the one hand, Paul now has no chance at winning the nomination. On the other hand, all of his supporters now have LaRGer peN!sEs.

Paul gets the chance to talk about one of his theories about the “tri-lateral commission,” in which the Death Star is conspiring with the International League of Justice to undermine America’s sovereignty (and make us watch the WNBA). This question moves quickly.

Someone asks a question about debt. McCain boasts that he will use a pen Ronald Reagan gave him to veto pork. Unfortunately, he carries his bragging too far, saying he would wear a jock strap given to him by Barry Goldwater while fighting excessive spending.

Next up, a question about federal spending from a hot chick on a webcam in Los Angeles. Confused, Fred Thompson pulls out his credit card.

In response to this question, the candidates take turns giving examples of programs they’d cut. Surprisingly, nobody takes a shot at FEMA, which seems like the most obvious piñata. (Wait – did I just say \”pinata?\” Hold on – I think the INS is at my door…)

John McCain goes after Ron Paul on the war, which causes all the commissioned Jedis in the audience to boo. It’s actually refreshing to see Paul contribute something to the race – as a punching bag for McCain. It’s safe to say that Ron Paul will not be heading up the Department of Crazy in the McCain administration.

Duncan Hunter said “Ronald Reagan.” Drink!

Romney answers a question about ethanol subsidies by saying he wants to avoid a food shortage. Since, of course, our children are suffering from just not having enough food to eat. This exposes Romney as a hypocrite, as he personally is causing a shortage in Just for Men hair coloring products.

Rudy Giuliani is asked about a scandal that has rocked his campaign – the fact that he held on to his horrifying combover until just last year.

We start with the candidate videos. Tom Tancredo inexplicably believes taking on Geraldo is like taking on Hillary Clinton. Aside from their thick, flowing mustaches, what’s the similarity between the two?

A question is asked about poisonous toys from China. Duncan Hunter says the Chinese can keep Audrey Raines in return for safe toys.

McCain’s video apparently was put together by a team of people who had to look at the instruction manual of their computers to figure out how to turn it on. Truly horrible.

The candidates are asked question about guns from a nut. Hey, another question about guns. How about that – another question on guns from a nut. Oh, by the way – has CNN told you that Republicans like to sho
ot guns? Well, they do!

The candidates then get a serious question about black on black crime from a father and son. Mitt Romney explains how he’s going to make sure that more families stay together. Of course, this hypothetical government program to keep families together is almost as horrifying as the problem it seeks to correct.

The crime question is a softball for Giuliani, who is itching to talk about his record as mayor. In fact, as mayor, he brags that reduced al-Qaeda related plane crashes into New York buildings by 100% in one year. Romney rebuts by saying he increased funding for DNA tests, yet my request to provide Jessica Alba with a DNA sample apparently has yet to be processed.

Ron Paul gets a question about abortion and talks about his career as an obstetrician. This means Ron Paul has seen more female genitalia than all of his supporters combined.

Giuliani strangely keeps calling Roe v. Wade “Roe Against Wade,” as if it were some sitcom debuting in CBS’ fall lineup.

A twitchy guy with a mini-beard asks the candidates if they believe the Bible literally. Giuliani says he doesn’t believe Jonah was in the belly of the whale. Ironically, the next video was from Jonah actually in the belly of the whale asking for help getting the hell out.

This question, of course, is ridiculously easy for Mike Huckabee, who’s a Baptist minister. It would be like asking Mitt Romney about hair care products. Speaking of Romney, his video is up next – and it appears that his greatest qualification for being President is that he’s exceptionally adept at rolling up his shirt sleeves.

The candidates are asked what they are going to do to better the image of America in the world. My suggestion: America should start wearing better-fitting clothes that draw the eye away from its trouble areas. And maybe wear nicer shoes.

The candidates are asked to weigh in on torture. While some of them seem sincere, none of them are willing to outlaw torture as a tool – which means terrorists will continue to be forced to watch more Republican candidate debates.

McCain answers a question about how much authority he would give his Vice President by saying he wants his VP to have expertise in a number of areas – telecommunications, gardening, operating a HAM radio, rollerblading, quilting, pilates, the periodic table, knifeplay, Excel, archery, fire safety…

There’s a question about gays in the military. Mitt Romney is challenged on a quote he gave in 1994 where he expressed hope that at some point in time gays could serve in the military, but almost falls off the stage backtracking – saying “now’s not the time.” Somewhere in America, the gay guy that was planning on voting for Romney just turned off his television in disgust.

CNN then allows the questioner to lecture the candidates for two minutes about how wrong they are, which leads to an uncomfortable scene where audience members catcall him, forcing him to stop talking and sit down. I anxiously await the next Democratic debate, when CNN allows an audience member to harangue the candidates for two minutes on abortion.

Romney said “Reagan.” Drink!

Huckabee says he’d be open to expanding the space program. This is good news, as we may finally be able to re-connect Dennis Kucinich with his family.

Rudy Giuliani lists kicking hundreds of thousands of African-Americans off welfare as a reason more blacks should vote for him. While there’s no doubt that welfare reform is a positive development, the following sequence of words have never been uttered: \”You mean I now have to work for all these benefits? How do I vote for you again?\”

Ron Paul doesn\’t know if he\’s going to run as an independent, but he says he went to a party once where there were a lot of \”blacks\” and \”hispanics.\” Honestly, Ron Paul is more likely to pour jello down his pants than make a relevant point in one of these debates.

Obviously, there was more covered than just what\’s in this seat-of-the-pants post. For a full listing of questions and answers, go here.

In summary, I don\’t think anyone distinguished themselves. My mind\’s still not made up on which candidate I\’m going to support. I just hope Ron Paul can set me up with some HoRNy HouSEWiveZZZ.

Do We Need More \”Public\” Interest Legislation?

Often times, you hear legislation derided as being a \”special interest\” bill.  Implied in that designation is the notion that the public is left out of writing new laws, with only high-priced lobbyists having access to legislators.  Recent news stories about \”the public\” make factcat special interests seem a lot more sympathetic.

According a recent Scripps Howard/Ohio University national poll, nearly two-thirds of Americans believe the U.S. Government ignored specific warnings about 9/11.  (A 2006 poll by the same researchers found that 36 percent of Americans believe federal government officials \”either assisted in the 9/11 attacks or took no action\” because they wanted \”to go to war in the Middle East.\”) Furthermore, 42% Americans think the government knew about the assassination of John F. Kennedy in advance, and 37% of Americans believe the government knows that UFOs are real.  They must have polled the entire Jetson family.

More concerning are the results of the poll dealing with economics.  According to the poll, eight out of 10 Americans suspect oil companies are conspiring to keep fuel prices high and 50 percent said a conspiracy is \”very likely.\” Only 14 percent felt it was unlikely.

So companies trying to charge as much as they can as long as people still buy their product is a \”conspiracy?\”  If so, then oil companies are a \”conspiracy\” in the same way that old people selling lawn elves on eBay are.  Maybe we should investigate them – how dare they try to get the best price for their product!

This poll was followed by news of a brawl in a Waukesha K-Mart , where people applying for a $4,000 line of credit thought they were getting \”free money.\”  Apparently not knowing what \”credit\” is, the store was flooded with applicants thinking they were getting free cash – causing a fight that led to arrests and hospitalization for a store employee.  (Do yourself a favor and watch the video clips attached to the story linked above – one credit applicant says she was caught in a \”trampede.\”)

However, before we criticize the people who though credit was free money, the whole K-Mart debacle isn\’t all that different from the way Wisconsin state government has treated debt.  The Governor and Legislature have increasingly been using the state\’s credit card to fund ongoing state operations – the equivalent of taking out a second mortgage to throw a pizza party.  So, in theory, K-Mart shoppers may be more fiscally conservative than state government.  They are shopping at K-Mart, after all.  The only difference is that when the state lines up for \”free money,\” it doesn\’t result in a floor covered in hair and earrings.

Whether it\’s voters or elected officials, there\’s plenty of education about economics that has to occur. In the case of voters, these are the people that are asked to vote in referendums to determine how much debt school districts should incur to build a new school. Maybe school districts should just go to K-Mart: it is free money, after all.

——————————————————————–

Further evidence that even elected officials often don\’t get it can be found in this article about the dispute between cable companies and the NFL Network.  The two entities have yet to reach agreement on carrying the network, which is leaving many Packer fans in the dark for the important Dallas game on Thursday night.  When asked for comment, Governor Doyle\’s spokesman, Matt Canter, said \”Both the cable companies and the NFL are making ridiculous profits, and this is nothing more than extortion from Packers fans.\”

There is nothing Doyle\’s spokespeople won\’t blame on \”ridiculous profits,\” whether it\’s oil companies, hospitals, drug companies, or cable companies.  Perhaps Canter missed this article from just last week that shows cable companies are hemorrhaging customers, in large part because of their impasse with sports-related stations.  If Matt Canter fell out of his bed, it\’s likely he\’d blame it on the \”ridiculous profits\” of mattress companies. 

Any time government gets to decide what an appropriate profit margin is, it spells big trouble for business and jobs.  Meanwhile, state government doesn\’t seem the least bit bashful about cashing in on \”ridiculous profits\” when revenue increases between 7% and 10% – a common occurence in the 1990s.  That money is coming out of the same pockets as people who subscribe to cable television service – only paying the state is mandatory.

Do We Need More “Public” Interest Legislation?

Often times, you hear legislation derided as being a “special interest” bill.  Implied in that designation is the notion that the public is left out of writing new laws, with only high-priced lobbyists having access to legislators.  Recent news stories about “the public” make factcat special interests seem a lot more sympathetic.

According a recent Scripps Howard/Ohio University national poll, nearly two-thirds of Americans believe the U.S. Government ignored specific warnings about 9/11.  (A 2006 poll by the same researchers found that 36 percent of Americans believe federal government officials “either assisted in the 9/11 attacks or took no action” because they wanted “to go to war in the Middle East.”) Furthermore, 42% Americans think the government knew about the assassination of John F. Kennedy in advance, and 37% of Americans believe the government knows that UFOs are real.  They must have polled the entire Jetson family.

More concerning are the results of the poll dealing with economics.  According to the poll, eight out of 10 Americans suspect oil companies are conspiring to keep fuel prices high and 50 percent said a conspiracy is “very likely.” Only 14 percent felt it was unlikely.

So companies trying to charge as much as they can as long as people still buy their product is a “conspiracy?”  If so, then oil companies are a “conspiracy” in the same way that old people selling lawn elves on eBay are.  Maybe we should investigate them – how dare they try to get the best price for their product!

This poll was followed by news of a brawl in a Waukesha K-Mart , where people applying for a $4,000 line of credit thought they were getting “free money.”  Apparently not knowing what “credit” is, the store was flooded with applicants thinking they were getting free cash – causing a fight that led to arrests and hospitalization for a store employee.  (Do yourself a favor and watch the video clips attached to the story linked above – one credit applicant says she was caught in a “trampede.”)

However, before we criticize the people who though credit was free money, the whole K-Mart debacle isn’t all that different from the way Wisconsin state government has treated debt.  The Governor and Legislature have increasingly been using the state’s credit card to fund ongoing state operations – the equivalent of taking out a second mortgage to throw a pizza party.  So, in theory, K-Mart shoppers may be more fiscally conservative than state government.  They are shopping at K-Mart, after all.  The only difference is that when the state lines up for “free money,” it doesn’t result in a floor covered in hair and earrings.

Whether it’s voters or elected officials, there’s plenty of education about economics that has to occur. In the case of voters, these are the people that are asked to vote in referendums to determine how much debt school districts should incur to build a new school. Maybe school districts should just go to K-Mart: it is free money, after all.

——————————————————————–

Further evidence that even elected officials often don’t get it can be found in this article about the dispute between cable companies and the NFL Network.  The two entities have yet to reach agreement on carrying the network, which is leaving many Packer fans in the dark for the important Dallas game on Thursday night.  When asked for comment, Governor Doyle’s spokesman, Matt Canter, said “Both the cable companies and the NFL are making ridiculous profits, and this is nothing more than extortion from Packers fans.”

There is nothing Doyle’s spokespeople won’t blame on “ridiculous profits,” whether it’s oil companies, hospitals, drug companies, or cable companies.  Perhaps Canter missed this article from just last week that shows cable companies are hemorrhaging customers, in large part because of their impasse with sports-related stations.  If Matt Canter fell out of his bed, it’s likely he’d blame it on the “ridiculous profits” of mattress companies. 

Any time government gets to decide what an appropriate profit margin is, it spells big trouble for business and jobs.  Meanwhile, state government doesn’t seem the least bit bashful about cashing in on “ridiculous profits” when revenue increases between 7% and 10% – a common occurence in the 1990s.  That money is coming out of the same pockets as people who subscribe to cable television service – only paying the state is mandatory.

More Constituent Tomfoolery

Yesterday, I wrote a post about some of the crazy constituent letters we used to get when I worked in the legislature. Here\’s another one worth reading – and remember, every time you pay your taxes, some of it goes to try to help families like this:

Page One
Page Two

(Again, click the magnifying glass on the top right of the image to read it more easily.)

And despite the entertainment value, it gets a lot scarier when you realize we got letters like this all the time.

« Older posts Newer posts »